A couple of things related to the filibuster

[sweet_chin_music]

http://www.voteupordown.com

Also, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) was just asked about a comment he made back in 1998 concerning filibuster's:

"I have stated over and over again on this floor that I would refuse to put an anonymous hold on any judge; that I would object and fight against any filibuster on a judge, whether it is somebody I opposed or supported; that I felt the Senate should do its duty. If we don't like somebody the President nominates, vote him or her down"

So what has changed in just 7 years? Do your job Senator and vote Yes or No.

[HockeyMonkey]

Here is some background information on filibuster and and cloture from the senate website....

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm


Using the filibuster to delay or block legislative action has a long history. The term filibuster -- from a Dutch word meaning "pirate" -- became popular in the 1850s, when it was applied to efforts to hold the Senate floor in order to prevent a vote on a bill.

In the early years of Congress, representatives as well as senators could filibuster. As the House of Representatives grew in numbers, however, revisions to the House rules limited debate. In the smaller Senate, unlimited debate continued on the grounds that any senator should have the right to speak as long as necessary on any issue.

In 1841, when the Democratic minority hoped to block a bank bill promoted by Kentucky Senator Henry Clay, he threatened to change Senate rules to allow the majority to close debate. Missouri Senator Thomas Hart Benton rebuked Clay for trying to stifle the Senate's right to unlimited debate.

Three quarters of a century later, in 1917, senators adopted a rule (Rule 22), at the urging President Woodrow Wilson, that allowed the Senate to end a debate with a two-thirds majority vote, a device known as "cloture." The new Senate rule was first put to the test in 1919, when the Senate invoked cloture to end a filibuster against the Treaty of Versailles. Even with the new cloture rule, filibusters remained an effective means to block legislation, since a two-thirds vote is difficult to obtain. Over the next five decades, the Senate occasionally tried to invoke cloture, but usually failed to gain the necessary two-thirds vote. Filibusters were particularly useful to Southern senators who sought to block civil rights legislation, until cloture was invoked after a fifty-seven day filibuster against the Civil Right Act of 1964. In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, or sixty of the current one hundred senators.

Many Americans are familiar with the filibuster conducted by Jimmy Stewart, playing Senator Jefferson Smith in Frank Capra's film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, but there have been some famous filibusters in the real-life Senate as well. During the 1930s, Senator Huey P. Long effectively used the filibuster against bills that he thought favored the rich over the poor. The Louisiana senator frustrated his colleagues while entertaining spectators with his recitations of Shakespeare and his reading of recipes for "pot-likkers." Long once held the Senate floor for fifteen hours. The record for the longest individual speech goes to South Carolina's J. Strom Thurmond who filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

[Zen Curmudgeon]

Regular people have different views than professional politicians. Is the air in D.C.? The water?

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=243

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted May 11-15 among 1,502 Americans, finds that by 37%-28%, the general public opposes changing the Senate rules to stop the use of filibusters against judicial nominees.

But a relatively large number of Americans (35%) have no opinion on the matter.

Among the minority who have followed the story fairly or very closely, a majority (54%) opposes changing the rules on Senate filibusters.

President Bush's overall job approval rating stands at 43%, down from 49% in late March.

Nearly two-thirds (64%) say Republicans and Democrats in Washington have been bickering and opposing one another more than usual this year, continuing an upward trend.

Take Care -

ZC

[Zen Curmudgeon]

Writing about the filibuster bicker-fest:

"Whatever the cause of this obstinacy, it seems almost seditious that one side ... would threaten to stop any and all progress in our beloved country, no matter the level of national importance."

Richard Halleck, Pueblo Chieftain, 5/22/05

Mr. Halleck should remember that "progress" and "Congress" are antonyms. :)

Take care -

ZC

[large]

Hmmm, lessee . . we elect our represenatives to represent "us" . . the balance in both the House and Senate reflect the voter's "leanings" . . .

Thus, however an issue is decided, it shouldn't be decided by some "Rule" of procedure . . . If 51% is what is required for a "simple" majority so be it. That's basically HOW the Senators were elected, supposedly . . . And while "Partisan" politics "Suck", the Democrats are just as deep in the muck as the Republicans are in the mire . . . and neither side seems to have their constituents in mind . . . Currently, Harry Reid seems to be the biggest Idiot, with Teddy K. running a close second. Their mouths absolutely cannot keep up with their overloaded A**es!

And in the last six months, I haven't heard ONE constructive idea or suggestion from the left side of the aisle . . not that the right has had many intellectual surges either, but they need to vote these people either UP or Down, quit the dealmaking, the B.S. and all the whining . . the posturing and the threats from the left to STOP the whole thing!

My own personal opinion, is, Take 'em all out on Pennsylvania Avenue and shoot 'em publicly . . Start over! But then I'm a radical middle of the roader!

Incidentally, "There's tho things in the middle of the road, a yellow line and Roadkill" . . . . soooooo . . .

[Zen Curmudgeon]

A group of 12 Senators from both sides of the aisle have reached an agreement to bring three of the President's nominees to the floor for a vote while preserving the filibuster option for future "extraordinary" circumstances.

The interesting thing is the absence of participation by the "leaders" of either party, Senators Frist and Reid, in reaching the compromise. I wonder how their respective members will view them in light of their failure to do what a handful of centrists accomplished.

By the way, one of the Democratic signatories to the agreement was Senator Ken Salazar. Freshman Senators rarely get the chance to play such a pivotal role. Wonder if this is a harbinger?

Take Care -

ZC